Posts by RobertBryant

Quote from THHuxleynew

But ITER HF research can be justified on grounds of scientific & technological content

What specific grounds and evidence justify the exorbitant hundred billion dollar ITER gravy train expenditure ???

compared to LENR investment such as Industrial Heat's thousand $ expenditure on Hagelstein and Lu's latest research?

Quote from JedRothwell

Like asking whether a 60 mm traverse was done over a 58-mm wide opening

This was not assertion.. just considered critique .

I always find THHnew 's critique illuminating.

Stop whinging... Jed

When is settled settled?

"I've never liked whingers. We all do it occasionally, but best not to make a habit of it."

Quote from THHuxleynew

PS - I'm also all for those (Hagelstein etc) who are trying to find LENR theories. That is a worthy endeavor too, and good science.

I guess THHnew is not settled on whether Hagelstein's endeavor is good science or fringe science..

judging by this cursory critique of Hagelstein's(and Siyuan Lu's latest 2018 Co-57 work)....

(funded partially by Industrial Heat.. also patentappliedfor

The second one( Hagelstein and Lu)

is a failure to discover data that would validate a novel theoretical mechanism,

together with some slightly (low level) anomalous data that was not previously predicted,

and for which a few candidate explanations are given.

However the data is weak, the explanations are speculative,

and other (also speculative) explanations for this type of small departure from an exact exponential might exist
So I don't see the second as LENR: unless you count the primary negative LENR result.

And its relatively weak publication is explained by the fact that it is a negative result on a fringe theory.

THH. News about Woodford and Industrial Heat

https://iscmns.org/2018/11/jcmnsv27/

Observation of Non-exponential Decay in X-ray and γ Emission Lines from Co-57

Florian Metzler, Peter Hagelstein and Siyuan Lu ,2018

Quote from seven_of_twenty

The guy is not responsible for the crap he posted?

At least one of seven_of_twenty must be

"This then became the beginning of the calculus which was to

grow into the Standard Model (Weinberg, 1995).

After the war, quantum electrodynamics was developed to explain

two experiments one by Lamb and one by Kusch

which found small deviations from non-relativistic quantum predictions.

To do this they invented the single virtual photon,

so they did not have to deal with potentials,
which they did not understand

This was a problem that went back to the 18th century that had to be resolved.

The Standard Model followed a similarly damaged path

using a linear relationship with a Lagrangian instead....."

Quote from THHuxleynew

I've never liked whingers.

Seems to be a personal comment unrelated to QED

typical THH critique

Quote from JedRothwell

every single product of modern industrial society is immensely complicated by the standards of the past.

The R20 could have been built with existing technology sixty years ago

The first R20 derived commercial reactor will be a lot less complicated than the

first nuclear reactor

The world's first "commercial nuclear power station", Calder Hall at Windscale, England,

was opened in 1956 with an initial capacity of 50 MW per reactor (200 MW total),

The fact that 3KW/300 W input generator made by hand burnishing of mesh is only available

in 2019 is a testimony to the intensity of the 30years of active suppression

of LENR R&D.

Imagine if the thermionic valve manufacturers had suppressed transistor R&D in the fifties.

for thirty years

Quote from JedRothwell

every single product of modern industrial society is immensely complicated by the standards of the past

A throwback to the past. Single use straws will soon be banned

The sixties equivalent of a hotwire anemometer was a Pitot tube and a water manometer

Quote from THHuxleynew

government commissioned research and technical development turns out to be surprisingly and badly wrong

"The science establishment has become a dangerous cult of anti-knowledge and the suppression of real innovation for humanity"

Mike Adams

Brighteon.com/6056583671001

https://www.naturalnews.com/20…out-cold-fusion-lenr.html

also courtesy of John Wallace

"

Currently cold fusion replication

now number in the thousands but the original discovery

in 1989 (Fleischmann and Pons, 1989) was only one of a

number different process which include fission from fracture

(Carpinteri et al., 2015) and dust enhanced fission

and fusion in microwave cavities (Egely, 2016), with recent

work (Mizuno and Rothwell, 2019) removing some of

the material road blocks to engineering application "

https://castinganalysis.com/files/DoE_comment_rev1.pdf

Quote from milton

Jed tells us the values are recorded from an anemometer

The power of the blower, VxI ,is used as a measure of flowspeed to get air massflowrate.

Obviously one does not want to do anemometer traverses all day long every minute of the day

These daylong ....week long reactor monitorings are like watching the paint dry.

The VxI readings are correlated with the anemometer traverses

..and this correlation changes if there are slight modifications to the airbox//blower configuration.

There is no magic physics involved... just fluid mechanics 101.. and an x-y correlation.
The endless hooplah abut this matter reveals much about the peanut crowd ..

Lets see what howls from the gallery this will generate.

zero about

The Standard Model origin (in letter to the DOE stalwarts)

courtesy of John Wallace

"This then became the beginning of the calculus which was to

grow into the Standard Model (Weinberg, 1995).

After the war, quantum electrodynamics was developed to explain

two experiments one by Lamb and one by Kusch

which found small deviations from non-relativistic quantum predictions.

To do this they invented the single virtual photon,

so they did not have to deal with potentials,
which they did not understand

This was a problem that went back to the 18th century that had to be resolved.

The Standard Model followed a similarly damaged path

using a linear relationship with a Lagrangian instead....."

https://castinganalysis.com/files/DoE_comment_rev1.pdf

Quote from skip

Where is this stated please?

2017 paper...

if reactor is different recently Mizuno would have said so

go with 316 ss

ID =10,8 cm

Maybe this is from local Sapporo machine shop.

+/0,5 cm shouldn't make a difference

Important ..thing ... the mesh is on inside in close contact with wall

Quote from anonymous

Why 304 stainless instead of 316? Does it matter? What did Mizuno use?

Mizuno used 316 ss

304ss might work too.. the difference is >2% moiybdenum

++$400 a pop

If you have cash to spare... try both....you might try Inconel as well

Quote from seven_of_twenty

What is the obsession with sucking eggs?

My grandma in Japan does know not that

heatflowrate =massflowrate x deltaT x heat capacity

Quote from seven_of_twenty

The argument that point temperature measurements are a lousy way to estimate heat flow still remains for many reasons

Air calorimetry:

heatflowrate = massflowrate x deltaT x heat capacity

If the mass flowrate is uniform across the flow as there is in the turbulent flow out of the blower..

and if the temperatures are not varying wildly every minute

then point measurements at one place ...the RTD in the outlet duct ..every 15 seconds are quite sufficient.

to calculate delta T,

Mizuno estimates the mass flowrate by an accurately calibrated blower fan calibration.

Quote from seven_of_twenty

temperature difference = heat flow x thermal resistance

thermal resistance is a difficult concept

stick with heatflow = massflow x deltaT x heat capacity ...three variables ..the last one ...less variable

Quote from JedRothwell

I still think that this along with his other "issues" -- such as the heat reaching the blower -- are bullshit, intended only to muddy up the discussion

Tondemonai.

THHnew has a sacred and unpaid duty to ferret out significant errors

Plaudits to THHnew.

Btw THHnew .. have you calculated the surface temperature of a cooktop element of area 0.028 m2 putting out 488W

by Stefan'sLaw using an emissivity of 0.8 or so

https://www.engineeringtoolbox…-heat-transfer-d_431.html

and do you still intimate that the velocity traverse method used in pipe ducts for the last eight decades or more

for process monitoring and regulatory requirements

can be in error by 20%?

Quote from seven_of_twenty

Air flow calorimeters are very difficult

For the replication ..use air flow calorimetry for x thousand $

Look for delta temperatures in in the airflow of 15 or 20 C for the active reactor.

Compare these with the calibration reactor.

I am sure GoogleX has nice water calorimeter they have spent x million $ to set up ..at UBC?

Perhaps they could adapt this to R20 for another x million $?

Quote from JedRothwell

If that is how he did it then, that's how he did it

After 2017 it appears that Mizuno has refined his calculation method..

there may also have been slight changes to the configuration.

Btw. .Jed

Did Mizuno continue calorimeter expts after the earthquake(s)

I think Monotaro..Sakaguchi does Watlow firerod

Their sheath is

INCOLOY nickel-iron-chromium alloy 800

https://www.watlow.com/en/prod…firerod-cartridge-heaters